| Literature DB >> 27762299 |
Ming-Hsun Wu1, Chiung-Nien Chen1, Kuen-Yuan Chen1, Ming-Chih Ho1, Hao-Chih Tai1, Yu-Hsin Wang2, Argon Chen3, King-Jen Chang1,4.
Abstract
Hypoechogenicity has been described qualitatively and is potentially subject to intra- and inter-observer variability. The aim of this study was to clarify whether quantitative echoic indexes (EIs) are useful for the detection of malignant thyroid nodules. Overall, 333 participants with 411 nodules were included in the final analysis. Quantification of echogenicity was performed using commercial software (AmCAD-UT; AmCad BioMed, Taiwan). The coordinates of three defined regions, the nodule, thyroid parenchyma, and strap muscle regions, were recorded in the database separately for subsequent analysis. And the results showed that ultrasound echogenicity (US-E), as assessed by clinicians, defined hypoechogenicity as an independent factor for malignancy. The EI, adjusted EI (EIN-T; EIN-M) and automatic EI(N-R)/R values between benign and malignant nodules were all significantly different, with lower values for malignant nodules. All of the EIs showed similar percentages of sensitivity and specificity and had better accuracies than US-E. In conclusion, the proposed quantitative EI seems more promising to constitute an important advancement than the conventional qualitative US-E in allowing for a more reliable distinction between benign and malignant thyroid nodules.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27762299 PMCID: PMC5071905 DOI: 10.1038/srep35632
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1A representative image to delineate the regions of the nodule, thyroid, and strap muscle.
Figure 2Autonomic references was calculated using the software for the same examples of images in Fig. 1.
Analysis of different US Characteristics of Benign and Malignant Thyroid Nodules.
| Parameter | Benign Nodules (n = 254) | Malignant Nodules (n = 157) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Size | <0001 | ||
| Major Diameter > = 2 cm | 178 (70.08%) | 69 (43.95%) | |
| Major Diameter < 2 cm | 76 (29.92%) | 88 (56.05%) | |
| Side | 0.9007 | ||
| Isthmus | 5 (1.97%) | 4 (2.55%) | |
| Left | 119 (46.85%) | 75 (47.77%) | |
| Right | 130 (51.18%) | 78 (49.68%) | |
| US-E | <0001 | ||
| Hypoechogenicity | 173 (68.11%) | 141 (89.81%) | |
| Hyperechogenicity/Isoechogenicity | 81 (31.89%) | 16 (10.19%) | |
| Margin | 0.0017 | ||
| Well defined | 81 (31.89%) | 28 (17.83%) | |
| Irregular | 173 (68.11%) | 129 (82.17%) | |
| Microcalcification | <0001 | ||
| Present | 46 (18.11%) | 68 (43.31%) | |
| Absent | 208 (81.89%) | 89 (56.69%) | |
| Echotexture | 0.016 | ||
| Homogeneous | 24 (9.45%) | 5 (3.18%) | |
| Heterogeneous | 230 (90.55%) | 152 (96.82%) |
Analysis of EIs of Benign and Malignant Thyroid Nodules.
| Parameter | Benign Nodules (n = 254) | Malignant Nodules (n = 157) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| EIN | 39.84 ± 16.23 | 27.39 ± 14.76 | <0001 |
| Adjusted EIs | |||
| EIN-T | −1.64 ± 18.44 | −13.65 ± 14.88 | <0001 |
| EIN-M | 22.45 ± 15.41 | 6.86 ± 15.69 | <0001 |
| Automatic EIs | |||
| EI(N-R)/R | 1.04 ± 0.9 | 0.22 ± 0.71 | <0001 |
Results of Analysis of US Characteristics and EIs for Detection Malignant Thyroid Nodules.
| Characteristic | beta Coefficient | Odds ratio | 95% confidence interval | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major Diameter <2 cm | 1.094 | 2.99 | 1.97–4.52 | <0.0001 |
| US-E Hypoechogenicity | 1.4173 | 4.13 | 2.31–7.37 | <0.0001 |
| Irregular Margin | 0.7688 | 2.16 | 1.33–3.51 | 0.002 |
| Microcalcification | 1.2396 | 3.45 | 2.21–5.41 | <0.0001 |
| Heterogenous Echotexture | 1.1544 | 3.17 | 1.19–8.49 | 0.0216 |
| EIN(less than median) | 1.7592 | 5.81 | 3.72–9.07 | <0.0001 |
| EIN-T(less than median) | 1.2091 | 3.35 | 2.2–5.1 | <0.0001 |
| EIN-M(less than median) | 1.6401 | 5.16 | 3.32–8 | <0.0001 |
| EI(N-R)/R(less than median) | 1.6906 | 5.42 | 3.49–8.44 | <0.0001 |
| EIN-T(less than zero) | 1.4571 | 4.29 | 2.71–6.8 | <0.0001 |
| EIN-M(less than zero) | 1.9319 | 6.9 | 3.81–12.5 | <0.0001 |
| EI(N-R)/R(less than median) | 1.6906 | 5.42 | 3.49–8.44 | <0.0001 |
| Major Diameter <2 cm | 1.0615 | 2.89 | 1.84–4.54 | <0.0001 |
| US-E Hypoechogenicity | 1.255 | 3.51 | 1.89–6.53 | <0.0001 |
| Irregular Margin | 0.3829 | 1.47 | 0.86–2.52 | 0.1641 |
| Microcalcification | 1.2353 | 3.44 | 2.11–5.6 | <0.0001 |
| Heterogenous Echotexture | 0.6845 | 1.98 | 0.67–5.88 | 0.2168 |
| Major Diameter <2 cm | 0.8452 | 2.33 | 1.47–3.7 | 0.0004 |
| EIN-T(less than zero) | 1.3062 | 3.69 | 2.24–6.09 | <0.0001 |
| Irregular Margin | 0.5469 | 1.73 | 1–2.99 | 0.0511 |
| Microcalcification | 1.1994 | 3.32 | 2.03–5.44 | <0.0001 |
| Heterogenous Echotexture | 0.8065 | 2.24 | 0.77–6.56 | 0.1414 |
Diagnostic performance of different US Characteristics and EIs.
| Characteristic | Sensitivity | Specificity | PPV | NPV | Accuracy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| US-E Hypoechogenicity | 0.8981 | 0.3189 | 0.449 | 0.8351 | 0.5401 |
| Microcalcification | 0.4331 | 0.8189 | 0.5965 | 0.7003 | 0.6715 |
| Irregular Margin | 0.8217 | 0.3189 | 0.4272 | 0.7431 | 0.5109 |
| Heterogenous Echotexture | 0.9682 | 0.0945 | 0.3979 | 0.8276 | 0.4282 |
| EIN(less than median) | 0.7516 | 0.6575 | 0.5756 | 0.8107 | 0.6934 |
| EIN-T(less than zero) | 0.7962 | 0.5236 | 0.5081 | 0.8061 | 0.6277 |
| EIN-M(less than zero) | 0.3312 | 0.9331 | 0.7536 | 0.693 | 0.7032 |
| EI(N-R)/R(less than median) | 0.7452 | 0.6496 | 0.568 | 0.8049 | 0.6861 |
Figure 3Nodules were classified into four groups according to the quartile of the EIN-M value. It shows the prevalence of cancer in the four EIN-M groups, and the prevalence of malignancy was significantly increased when the value of EIN-M was decreased.
(p < 0.001).
Figure 4It shows that echogenicity index (EIN-M and automatic EI (EI(N-R)/R) values for lesions classified as nodular goiter (n = 225), follicular adenoma (n = 29), papillary thyroid cancer (n = 140), follicular thyroid cancer (n = 7), and others (medullary thyroid cancers (n = 7), anaplastic thyroid cancers (n = 2) and lymphoma (n = 1).